Search Results

1. [2022] NZEmpC 21 Baillie v The Chief Executive of Oranga Tamariki - Ministry for Children [pdf, 222 KB]

   ...Baillie also points to the lack of any agreement from Oranga Tamariki to place Mr Baillie on “garden leave” pending determination of his substantive claim. [32] Oranga Tamariki points to its obligations to provide the highest possible level of care to some of New Zealand’s most vulnerable children and young people and that reinstating Mr Baillie on an interim basis would not give those vulnerable people a sense of feeling safe. Oranga Tamariki says that any loss of remunerati...

2. Singh v Devi [2011] NZIACDT 22 (7 July 2011) [pdf, 103 KB]

   ...Conduct developed pursuant to section 37 of the Act (published www.iaa.govt.nz) is also material. Section 44(2) makes a breach of the Code grounds for upholding a complaint. [3] Clause 1 of the Code requires a licensed immigration adviser to, with due care, diligence, respect and professionalism, perform his or her services, act on proper instructions, and pursue their clients’ interests. That clause also requires personal documents to be secured and returned to a client. Factual Iss...

3. Orsborn v CAC 20006 & Warwick Collier & JVL Prestige Realty Ltd [2012] NZREADT 73 [pdf, 51 KB]

   ...as “3.4782 hectares more or less”. The Committee’s Assessment of the Licensee’s Conduct [15] The Committee was of the view that the licensee’s conduct breached Rule 6.4 of the Real Estate Agents Act (Professional Conduct and Client Care) Rules 2009 (Rules) so that it amounted to unsatisfactory conduct pursuant to s.72(b) of the Act. We now set out both Rule 6.4 and s.72 of the Act as follows: 4 “6 Standards of professional conduct 6.4 A licensee must...

4. [2023] NZIACDT 14 - II v Sun (26 April 2023) [pdf, 118 KB]

   ...Visa), for the complainant and associated visas for his wife and their child. The complainant was the principal applicant. [7] Immigration New Zealand (Immigration NZ) completed an initial assessment of the application and wrote to the complainant, care of Mr Sun, on 18 November 2019, setting out numerous concerns with the application. He was invited to provide further information. [8] On 28 November 2019, Ms M, an employee of Heytour in China, rang the complainant (who was in Ch...

5. LCRO 179/2017 VB, CB & ON v QT (14 June 2018) [pdf, 181 KB]

   ...which allows a Legal Complaints Review Officer (LCRO) to conduct the review on the basis of all information available if the LCRO considers that the review can be adequately determined in the absence of the parties. [24] I record that having carefully read the complaint, the response to the complaint, the Committee’s decision and the submissions filed in support of and in opposition to the application for review, there are no additional issues or questions in my mind that neces...

6. LG v Otago SC LCRO 275 / 2011 (29 May 2012) [pdf, 80 KB]

   ...clients’ attention that their old easements were surrendered but the new easements had not been registered. As a result of this failure we have been obliged to drive the process to have the new easements registered and their future water rights protected. Therefore our clients now 3 require that you pay their remaining costs for this firm undertaking this work on their behalf. We enclose herewith copies of our account for $1,227.49 and $587.49 and look forward to your immedi...

7. Regulatory Impact Statement: Order of Inquiries to determine fitness to stand trial under the Criminal Procedure (Mentally Impaired Persons) Act 2003 [pdf, 600 KB]

   ...to the standard criminal trial process. If unfit, the court must consider the most suitable method of dealing with the defendant. The possible outcomes for the defendant under the Act are detention in a hospital or secure facility, compulsory care or treatment, or immediate release. 5. Any participant in the case (including the judge or the prosecutor) can raise the issue of fitness to stand trial. In practice, it is most likely to be raised by the defendant or their lawyer. O...

8. Auckland Standards Committee v Morahan [2015] NZLCDT 29 [pdf, 459 KB]

   ...There are six charges remaining. (a) Charge one is an allegation of misconduct by wilfully or recklessly acting for a client without an instructing solicitor in breach of Rule 14.4 of the Lawyers and Conveyancers Act (Lawyers: Conduct and Client Care) Rules 2008 (“the Rules”).2 (b) Charge three is an allegation of misconduct by misleading the Court, opposing counsel, and/or the Standards Committee, by asserting in written correspondence and Court documents that Mr Thompson...

9. Mao v Howitt [pdf, 60 KB]

   ...from his non-participation that he accepts liability to the claimants and that he accepts that his construction of 02442 Determination.doc 2 the dwelling was defective and did not comply with the Building Code or discharge his duty of care to the claimants as subsequent purchasers. 2.3 The respondent, Douglas Mackay Howitt, had obligations under the Building Act 1991 to meet the performance criteria of the Building Code and he owed a non- delegable duty of care to the cl...

10. [2011] NZEmpC 129 Patel v Pegasus Stations Ltd [pdf, 95 KB]

    ...as raised by the Plaintiff with the Defendant in the above correspondence is not couched as a personal grievance, but even if it were (denied) it is not raised in conformity with s114. It is phrased in the nature of a tort (breach of a duty of care) rather than a disadvantage personal grievance. 17. The Authority had no jurisdiction in tort. The Court’s jurisdiction in tort is limited to industrial action. 18. The forged signature issue as raised by the Plaintiff with the D...